Ultimatt

31 ms·

361.
by Ultimatt 11y ago
Perl 6 has full gradual typing YAY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=id4pDstMu1s
362.
by Ultimatt 11y ago
Playing aka learning in this profession. Some still care to work towards being able to contribute to the "options" that are in play. This is how those developers and new options are born.
363.
by Ultimatt 11y ago
> the development cycle isn't nearly as crazy as Perl What regular releases every six months? With a standard mechanism for saying you are using a given new feature or expect a given versioned behaviour... yeah so cRaZzzY.
364.
by Ultimatt 12y ago
Not sure I get why the author of the article didn't just use the well known Bitap algorithm? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitap_algorithm
365.
by Ultimatt 12y ago
Lol not sure I would go as far to say its just started to blossom. Some flowers are weeds to one person and a pay-for wild flowers to another. Each to their own!
366.
by Ultimatt 12y ago
Hah I wouldn't worry it was a by-hand prepared sequence file of the sequence for a known structure I was emailed. The comment line had some interesting PDB data encoded :)
367.
by Ultimatt 12y ago
Ermmm I wrote a whole blogpost on some of the killer features for Perl 6 in bioinformatics :P There are a lot of primitive types that are useful for scientific programming. A lot of my bioinformatics work at least gets reduces to bag models
368.
by Ultimatt 12y ago
The web is dominated by PHP!
369.
by Ultimatt 12y ago
Great thanks! So I think there are two things about your code which are different. You are getting the names and values of the spam function with show_me() ? My version gets the next level up which is the names of the variables passed in to
370.
by Ultimatt 12y ago
Yeah I would rather all the awful formats would go away. But the process of removing them tends to just birth new awful formats into existence :(
371.
by Ultimatt 12y ago
Oh I've seen them used in the wild... I'd rather have a parser throw an exception than have that data go through though lol
372.
by Ultimatt 12y ago
Author of the post here. I think my comeback would be Perl 6 is a completely new language, that's only just becoming usable from a long design and development process. A lot of people dont think about it this way because they have zero
373.
by Ultimatt 12y ago
Sure but the nice thing is you can just add an extra catch all to the Grammar. Or better yet create a new Grammar for that specific sequencing machine and override the token. For example just adding: rule sequence:sym<seq> { <-[\&g
374.
by Ultimatt 12y ago
Update for the superiority, though that is part my flippant language use and some projection :P The comment section in the grammar isn't comments as in ; line comments but the per sequence comments usually used to encode extra meta inf
375.
by Ultimatt 12y ago
needs use feature 'say'
376.
by Ultimatt 12y ago
You wont get many opinions of people's experience of Perl6 from Hacker News. Just a lot of rage and assumptions it's somehow just like Perl5, which it's not. There are only a few of us (tens, maybe a hundred very quiet people
377.
by Ultimatt 12y ago
Not true for Perl6 at the moment. Perl6 is an entirely different language with its own implementation. At the moment it will be either on par or slower than Ruby. For some select numerical operations Perl6 is faster than Perl5. But for the
378.
by Ultimatt 12y ago
5.10 in production? Surely you're joking! 5.8 or bust.
379.
by Ultimatt 12y ago
I'd like to point out there are magical errors put in to keep Perl6 code relatively sane too: > .map: ** * * * ** ===SORRY!=== Error while compiling <unknown file> Multiple HyperWhatevers and Whatevers may not be used
380.
by Ultimatt 12y ago
It's not just one argument! I't consumes as many arguments as you like, there is also the HYPER WHATEVER which is two asterisc in a row * * (without white space a limitation of HN!) which is a dimensioned form of whatever for deal
381.
by Ultimatt 12y ago
Perl6 advent calendar post (from 2012) on macros might be of interest http://perl6advent.wordpress.com/2012/12/23/day-23-macros/
382.
by Ultimatt 12y ago
Catalyst is not less complex than Mojolicious, if that is your measure of goodness. From an installing pov or from usability. In Mojolicious you don't need Moose, and you don't have an explicit model layer so you aren't pushe
383.
by Ultimatt 12y ago
I think you're missing the point. Once its a lot more trivial to synthesize a cell from data its not just blue skies scientists involved anymore. When anyone can do whatever they like you will get misuse of the technology.